JUDGMENT

Sudhir Mittal, J. - The petitioners are the judgment-debtors. They have approached this Court through this revision petition because the Executing Court has refused to recall the order by which they were proceeded against ex parte.

2. Respondent No. 1-plaintiff had filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell dated 25.12.2010 in respect of land measuring 40 kanal 11 marlas. During the pendency of the suit, the parties reached an amicable settlement and based thereupon compromise decree dated 10.09.2015 was passed. One of the terms of the decree was that sale deed was to be executed on or before 15.05.2016 and in case, the remaining consideration amounting to Rs.6.5 lacs was not deposited by then, the earnest money would stand forfeited and theagreement would stand cancelled. According to the petitioners-JDs, the balance amount was deposited on 08.07.2016. Execution petition was preferred on 29.11.2018 and the JDs were proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 08.03.2019. Application dated 21.10.2019 for setting aside the ex parte order was filed but the same has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 05.10.2021. The Executing Court has